Gun violence is rampant in the news. The Columbine High School massacre in Colorado that left 12 students and one teacher dead, set the scene for school shootings in 1999, and we have seen them continue through the Newtown, Connecticut […]
The State Supreme Court has decided that Proposition 215 does not prohibit cities and counties from banning marijuana storefronts from operating within their boundaries, upholding a zoning issue from the City of Riverside that shutdown the City’s pot shops. The […]
San Bernardino Residents for Responsible Government has notified all the members of the City Council as well as the City’s Mayor and City Attorney that they intend to throw them all out of office. The announcement, via press release, press […]
California, more than any other state in the country, is not fully utilizing the Federally funded Safe Drinking Water State Revolving Fund. Only 63 percent of the $1.5 billion allotted to California over the last 15 years has been used. […]
In response to The Governor’s May Revision, which calls for redistributing hundreds of millions of dollars in health care realignment funding that counties currently use to provide care for medically indigent adults and for essential public health services we all rely on, the California State Association of Counties issued the following statement:
“We appreciate that the Governor’s May Revision Budget recognizes that Medi-Cal expansion on January 1, 2014 is an important goal, and that any redistribution of funds should be based on actual savings generated by the ACA rather than an arbitrary number,” said David Finigan, President of CSAC and Del Norte County Supervisor. “Unfortunately under the formula outlined today, the money will be taken too soon and the ‘true up’ formula will come too late. In the meantime, people depending on local health care safety net services will suffer.”
“Under this proposal, it is actually the state that would be paid twice,” said Finigan. “The federal government has pledged to pay 100% of the costs of insuring this new population for the first three years, so redirecting county funding right away is duplicative and unnecessary.”[...]
Over the past year, 2238 children in Santa Clara County were placed in foster care for at least one day. On Tuesday, the Board of Supervisors proclaimed May as Foster Care Appreciation Month, to recognize the outstanding contributions of hundreds of foster parents.
“We salute our foster parents for their dedicated and generous care of the County’s most vulnerable children,” said President Ken Yeager, County of Santa Clara Board of Supervisors. ”Foster parents provide love and hope for children experiencing a great deal of uncertainty in their lives.”
The National Data Archive on Child Abuse & Neglect indicates that over 50,000 children in California rely on the foster care system. Although state and local efforts have helped decrease the number in favor of more permanent alternatives, family reunification is not always successful. Over 1,000 children and youth in Santa Clara County are currently under the care of the Department of Family and Children Services because of abuse, neglect, abandonment or other personal issues. They live with foster families, relatives, extended family members or group homes.[...]
CCMF is proud to announce the launch of their seventh video in the 2013 ‘Meet Your City Manager’ series, featuring John Shirey. The video series features candid interviews with city managers from across California talking about the council-manager relationship, their favorite accomplishments as managers and their love for the profession.
Gun violence is rampant in the news. The Columbine High School massacre in Colorado that left 12 students and one teacher dead, set the scene for school shootings in 1999, and we have seen them continue through the Newtown, Connecticut tragedy last December. With the theater shooting in Aurora, Colorado that left 12 people dead and 58 injured by a gunman armed with multiple firearms and the shooting of U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and others at an Arizona strip mall, some citizens no longer feel safe to go about their daily lives. Calls for revised gun control laws have stalled in Congress. What people are failing to notice, however, is that there are already laws available, at least in California, that can help in preventing such tragedies.
News reports regarding the perpetrators of these mass shootings undoubtedly include storied tales of prior mental illness. Such was the case with Patrick Purdy, a mentally ill drifter who killed five schoolchildren and wounded 31 others at a Stockton elementary school in 1989. And with the Virginia Tech shooter, Seung-Hui Cho, who was detained overnight at a hospital prior to committing the nation’s deadliest school shooting that left 32 people dead in 2007. Cho was hospitalized after his roommate became concerned when Cho threatened to take his own life, which he ended up doing after his killing spree.
In California, local entities can use Welfare and Institutions Code section 8102 to protect their residents from those whose mental condition presents a danger to themselves or others. Most jurisdictions are familiar with that code, which is used to remove deadly weapons from persons whom law enforcement, using Welfare and Institutions Code section 5150, has determined present a danger to themselves or others. Most jurisdictions, however, are not using Section 8102 to its most beneficial use. Instead of using the provisions found in Section 8102 to obtain the permanent forfeiture of deadly weapons, many agencies simply return weapons seized during a 5150 detention.[...]
Governor Jerry Brown released his May Revision to the State budget, kicking off this year’s budget tango between the Governor, legislature, cities, counties, special districts, special interests, and the public. Local governments, and particularly counties, were anticipating further details on the Affordable Care Act and its implementation in California. Some detail was provided.
“In the budget summary released shortly after Governor Brown took the podium in the Capitol, The state currently dedicates about $1.5 billion annually to counties for health care, primarily for services for indigent adults — many of the same people who will move to Medi‑Cal under the new law. While the need for county indigent services will continue and preserving a safety net is a priority, the state cannot — and should not — pay for the same services twice. Consequently, the May Revision proposes that over time, as the state takes on more responsibility for health care, counties take on more financial responsibility for certain human services programs. To ensure adequate funding remains at the county level for safety net services, dollars would only be redirected based on actual county‑by‑county experience. The goal is to allocate risk fairly, strengthen local flexibility, and clearly delineate the respective responsibilities of the state and the counties.”
Like so many others, we will closely monitor what this means for counties and healthcare providers.[...]
The Southern California City of Anaheim is home to one of the most iconic amusement parks in the country, but even that is only a piece of what Anaheim offers. The dynamic community of more than 300,000 residents is the largest city in Orange County and the 10th largest city in the state. Now, for the right candidate, the City of Anaheim can also present a tremendous opportunity for its next City Manager.
This is an extraordinary opportunity to help lead one of the country’s most dynamic cities. As the City continues to attract population growth and economic expansion, its municipal services are constantly being improved to serve residential and business needs.
The City Manager serves the Mayor, City Council, and the community by delivering public services effectively and efficiently. In addition to traditional full-service city functions, the Anaheim City Manager has oversight responsibilities for the enterprise operations of the Electric and Water Utilities, Anaheim Convention Center, Angel Stadium of Anaheim, Honda Center of Anaheim, City National Grove of Anaheim, and two Municipal Golf Courses.[...]
Originally published at www.foxandhoundsdaily.com
Joel Fox is the Editor of Fox & Hounds and President of the Small Business Action Committee
Last week, it was revealed that the Los Angeles city Department of Transportation was sitting on $42.6 million in hidden funds, which immediately became an issue in the mayor’s race. It could be a make-or-break issue for the candidates, City Controller Wendy Greuel and councilman Eric Garcetti, depending how well they articulate their arguments on the matter.
Similar in feel to the “discovered” funds in the state’s parks department that sizzled in the headlines last year, the $42.6 million would have been beneficial to the city during the great recession when services were cut back for lack of funds.
As the Los Angeles Times described the tale of the “misplaced” funds, “In theory, the city allocates money to a fund so a department has cash to start a project. Once the grant arrives, the department reimburses the city. But from 1995 to 2011, the city was reimbursed from the transportation grant fund only twice, according to a City Council memo. The money grew in a fund that was not audited or examined.”[...]
The draft budget released by the Orange County Supervisors faces a $73 million uncertainty as County managers work to address a possible revenue shortfall following a tentative court ruling. The County had withheld some tax revenue to offset funds lost from VLF fees, but a judge has tentatively sided with the State, saying that money is due back to Sacramento.
The $73 million judgment wouldn’t break the budget or the bank, after the County was able to restore some of its rainy day fund and came into this fiscal year with a balance of more than $250 million. However, depleting the emergency account so early into its rebuilding could pose problematic. Instead, alternatives are being considered.
Options include expense reductions, increasing estimates of future revenues, or continuing to defer maintenance projects that have been on hold during the recession.
Despite the possible loss of revenues, the budget does provide for an increase in staffing and provides funding for an additional 297 positions.
Read the full story at the Voice of OC.[...]
Los Angeles County is home to about 1 in 10 of the nation’s undocumented population, and that means that the immigration reform proposal being debated in Washington could have real fiscal impacts on the County and its services. Last time a pathway to citizenship was approved by the federal government, state and local governments were allocated $4 billion to cover associated costs. This time, no such fund has been established.
Without the promise of federal subsidies, County officials are looking at the potential impact to the County’s bottom line. Although the draft of the proposal bars newly legalized residents from receiving service or federal subsidies for 10 years, it will not prevent these people from turning to local services. Adult education centers, which provide courses in English, would likely see increased traffic despite decreased funding. Basic healthcare could also see an influx of patients. The County already spends about $600 million annually on healthcare for the undocumented population.
State and local leaders from across the country hope that congress appropriates some funds to protect them, even drawing upon the fines, fees, and taxes paid as part of the pathway to citizenship. Currently, however, that money is earmarked to securing the border. Senator Dianne Feinstein broached the issue during the Senate Judiciary Hearing, where she said she would direct her own staff to look into a “state impact assistance” fund.
Read the full story at the Los Angeles Times.[...]
A lawsuit brought against Contra Costa County in 2012 has been revived after a previous dismissal has been overturned after an amended filing was heard in U.S. District Court. Judge Jon Tigar has decided that City MOUs and resolutions may be used to outline terms of a contractual intent to provide benefits in perpetuity.
The ruling has paved the way for a group representing retirees to challenge a 2010 reform to retiree healthcare. Previously, the County had provided 80 percent of premiums for retirees and their dependents. But the County changed that policy three years ago, instead opting to provide a flat cap to cover some of healthcare expenses. The rest would be the responsibility of retirees to cover.
The amended filing relied upon memorandums of understanding, as well as resolutions approved by the Board of Supervisors, to provide the terms of an implied contract between the County and its workers. Those terms would be vested rights under case law, which could undermine the 2010 reform and restore 80 percent coverage for health premiums.
Read the full story at Courthouse News Service.[...]